Jim Nasby wrote:
> If you setup some form of replication it's very easy to move to
> larger servers as you grow. I'm sure that when Kevin moved their
> database it was a complete non-event.
Yeah, replication was turned on for the new server in addition to
the old one. When everything was ready
On 8/31/13 9:44 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
bsreejithin wrote:
What I posted is about a new setup that's going to come
up..Discussions are on whether to setup DB cluster to handle 1000
concurrent users.
I previously worked for Wisconsin Courts, where we had a single
server which handled about
bsreejithin wrote:
>
> I am *expecting 1000+ hits to my PostgreSQL DB* and I doubt my standalone DB
> will be able to handle it.
>
> So I want to *scale out by adding more servers to share the load*. For this,
> I want to do clustering.
>
> DB server was 4 Core 12GB RAM.
You're jumping way ahea
On 08/30/2013 01:48 AM, bsreejithin wrote:
> Ya..sure...Migration to 9.2 is one of the activities planned and in fact
> it's already on track.Thanks Thomas
You'll want to re-do your performance testing; a huge amount has changed
since 8.2.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadra
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 6:14 AM, bsreejithin wrote:
>
> I am *expecting 1000+ hits to my PostgreSQL DB* and I doubt my standalone DB
> will be able to handle it.
>
> So I want to *scale out by adding more servers to share the load*. For this,
> I want to do clustering.
>
> I am *curious to know ho
bsreejithin wrote:
> What I posted is about a new setup that's going to come
> up..Discussions are on whether to setup DB cluster to handle 1000
> concurrent users.
I previously worked for Wisconsin Courts, where we had a single
server which handled about 3000 web users collectively generating
h
Ya..sure...Migration to 9.2 is one of the activities planned and in fact
it's already on track.Thanks Thomas
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 11:16 PM, Thomas Kellerer [via PostgreSQL] <
ml-node+s1045698n5768973...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:
> bsreejithin wrote on 29.08.2013 18:13:
> > PostgreSQL version was*
bsreejithin wrote on 29.08.2013 18:13:
PostgreSQL version was* 8.2*.
8.2 has long been deprecated.
For a new system you should use 9.2 (or at least 9.1)
Thomas
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.p
Thanks Joshua..Will look to use connection pooler which Igor mentioned..
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/How-clustering-for-scale-out-works-in-PostgreSQL-tp5768917p5768961.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Ok Igor..Will check out PgBouncer..Thanks a lot.
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/How-clustering-for-scale-out-works-in-PostgreSQL-tp5768917p5768960.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Sent via pgsql-perfo
> -Original Message-
> From: pgsql-performance-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-
> performance-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of bsreejithin
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 12:42 PM
> To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] How clustering for
On 08/29/2013 09:42 AM, bsreejithin wrote:
The performance test that was conducted was for 1 Hour.
There are 6 transactions. 2 DB inserts and 4 SELECTs.
Every 2 minutes there will be 4 SELECTs. And every 3 minutes there will be 2
DB inserts.
This shouldn't be a problem with proper hardware a
The performance test that was conducted was for 1 Hour.
There are 6 transactions. 2 DB inserts and 4 SELECTs.
Every 2 minutes there will be 4 SELECTs. And every 3 minutes there will be 2
DB inserts.
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/How-clustering-for-sc
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 11:13 AM, bsreejithin wrote:
> Thanks a lot Joshua and others who have responded..
>
> I am sorry about not putting in more details in my initial post.
>
> What I posted is about a new setup that's going to come up..Discussions are
> on whether to setup DB cluster to handl
Thanks a lot Joshua and others who have responded..
I am sorry about not putting in more details in my initial post.
What I posted is about a new setup that's going to come up..Discussions are
on whether to setup DB cluster to handle 1000 concurrent users.
DB cluster was thought of because of th
On 08/29/2013 07:59 AM, Richard Huxton wrote:
On 29/08/13 13:14, bsreejithin wrote:
I am *expecting 1000+ hits to my PostgreSQL DB* and I doubt my
standalone DB
will be able to handle it.
We are going to need a little more detail here. In a normal environment
1000+ "hits" isn't that much,
On 29/08/13 13:14, bsreejithin wrote:
I am *expecting 1000+ hits to my PostgreSQL DB* and I doubt my standalone DB
will be able to handle it.
OMG! 1000 hits every year! And "hits" too - not just any type of
query :-)
Seriously, if you try describing your setup, what queries make up your
I am *expecting 1000+ hits to my PostgreSQL DB* and I doubt my standalone DB
will be able to handle it.
So I want to *scale out by adding more servers to share the load*. For this,
I want to do clustering.
I am *curious to know how clustering works in PostgreSQL.* (I don't want to
know how to se
18 matches
Mail list logo
